Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Laura Linney’

Love Actually (2003)

–But you know the thing about romance is people only get together right at the very end.

 

The cast of Love Actually reads like the British romantic comedy version of How the West Was Won: Hugh Grant, Emma Thompson, Liam Neeson, Alan Rickman, Colin Firth, Keira Knightley, Laura Linney and Bill Nighy. That’s a lot of A-list British talent (aside from Linney who is American) put together for the directorial debut of Richard Curtis, more famous for his scripts of hits like Four Weddings and a Funeral and Notting Hill. The premise is to take a look at love in different guises from the first flush of romance to the disillusionment of a possibly cheating spouse. There are eight different “couples” examined here and not all of them are romantic. Although the narrative is split betwixt the different plotlines like Short Cuts or Pulp Fiction, this is clearly not meant to be taken too seriously – thankfully, since Americans do not come off that well. Instead, we are treated to the ultimate romantic comedy full of sighs, sex, and occasional silliness.

On the romantic side we have two couples who follow the traditional rom-com patterns. The new British Prime Minister (Hugh Grant) upon being shown around Number 10 Downing Street for the first time is smitten by one of the young women, Natalie (Martine McCutcheon) working there. He finds this terribly inconvenient and distracting, especially when the President of the United States (played very threateningly by Billy Bob Thornton) takes too keen an interest in her as well. The other traditional couple is Jamie Bennett, a writer whose girlfriend was cheating on him, and the Portuguese woman who comes in to clean, Aurelia. Actually, I just realized that both men, in essence, fell in love with their housekeepers. Interesting parallel.

Then we have a most untraditional way of meeting your soul mate: both of you being body doubles/stand-ins. Judy and John meet on set and we follow their continued awkward, sweet and mundane conversation while they are asked to strip and assume racy positions for camera setups. Ironically, theirs is the most old-fashioned romance outside of work. They go on an innocent date together and attempt to actually get to know each other. After all, they’ve already seen all of the other stuff!

Emma Thompson and Laura Linney break the audience’s hearts. Linney plays  Sarah who has been in love with a co-worker named Karl for a long time. He suddenly seems to be paying attention to her, but she has to juggle her social life with her familial responsibilities. She’s a woman who has to make hard choices, and in many ways hers is one of the most realistic stories. Thompson is married to Alan Rickman’s character, Harry. Harry is being aggressively pursued by a young woman who works for him. I don’t think I’ve wanted to hit any of Rickman’s more famous villainous characters as much as I did Harry who made Emma Thompson’s Karen cry. Thompson’s performance here reminds one of her Eleanor from Sense and Sensibility. Both are practical women who repress their own heartaches in order to get on with the work in life. Seeing either of them break down results in homicidal instincts for the viewer.

A more unconventional relationship is that between Keira Knightley’s  Juliet and Andrew Lincoln’s Mark. Juliet has just married Peter, Mark’s best friend. She notices that Mark is uncomfortable around her, and assumes he doesn’t like her. She is surprised to discover that the reverse is true: he has fallen in love with her. The situation is handled with a surprising delicacy. There are no implications that Peter is not right for Juliet, and Mark has no wish to damage either the new marriage or the old friendship. This is a situation that can’t go anywhere without irreparable damage to innocent people which both Mark and Juliet recognize.

Bill Nighy plays an obnoxious ex-rock star, Billy Mack, who desperately needs a new hit. He cranks out a cover of “Love is All Around” and turns it into a Christmas song. To the mortification of his underappreciated manager, Billy Mack denigrates the song at every opportunity while also appealing to people to make it a number one song anyway. The relationship between Billy Mack and his manager is funny and poignant as Billy finally realizes that his manager is the only person who has been there for him through thick and thin.

The final couple is my favorite part of the movie: Liam Neeson’s Daniel and his stepson, Sam. Daniel and Sam have recently lost their wife/mother. Sam becomes reclusive and Daniel is afraid something is horribly wrong with him. As it turns out, he’s in love, which relieves Daniel. Sam points out “the terrible agony of being in love.” After reflection, Daniel has to agree. Isn’t he in deep mourning because of that same terrible agony? Not to mention that for the young, love is deathly serious business. Young Thomas Sangster who plays Sam is an utter delight. He completely captures the type of child who talks earnestly like someone far older than his actual age. His chemistry with Neeson is unforced and very heartwarming. They help pull each other through the bleak days of mourning and give each other love, hope and the occasional kick in the pants (or sappy romantic movie, whichever is required).

While this movie will never take the place of It’s a Wonderful Life, it is a heartwarming look at love in different guises set at Christmas. My only complaint would be that we poor Americans come off quite badly in this film (other than the lovely Laura Linney). While it’s understandable that British sentiment toward American politics in general and the American presidency more specifically would be a bit threadbare in 2003, the other female American characters other than Sarah, are sex-crazed airheads straight from caricatures of male fantasy. I cringed the entire time they were on-screen. Still, ignoring the bimbos, there’s a lot to be enjoyed.

Read Full Post »

The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)

–Once you’ve looked into the darkness I think you carry it with you for the rest of your life.

 

The Exorcism of Emily Rose inspires mixed responses from horror fans. Some think it terrifying and others not very scary because of its structure. It alternates between showing Emily Rose’s story and the trial of Father Moore, the priest who attempted to perform an exorcism upon her. This makes the film an unusual hybrid: half horror flick, half courtroom drama. The script is based upon the life of Anneliese Michel, a young German woman who died in 1976 after starving herself following multiple attempts at exorcism as well as the trial held after her death accusing her exorcist and parents of negligent homicide.

Such material takes a balanced hand. Luckily the film is anchored by two outstanding actors: Tom Wilkinson as Father Moore and Laura Linney as his defense lawyer, Erin Bruner. Both give subtle, restrained performances that firmly root the courtroom scenes in reality. Jennifer Carpenter also stands out as Emily Rose.

Erin Bruner is a hotshot lawyer for a prestigious law firm. After a spectacular success with a high profile case she is asked by the church to handle Father Moore’s legal difficulties. One problem, Father Moore will only accept her as his attorney if she promises to let him tell Emily Rose’s story while the church is adamant that under no circumstances is Moore to testify. Further, possibly supernatural, complications ensue as strange things start happening to Bruner that mirror events in Emily Rose’s life.

The courtroom scenes are taut and nicely paced while the flashbacks are reasonably scary and intense. The filmmakers deliberately try to keep the movie neutral on its position about Emily Rose. What happened to her was horrible, but was it the result of epilepsy or possession? No one seems to doubt that Father Moore is a good man who believed in what he was doing, but as one of the only people that Emily would listen to, shouldn’t he have made sure that she received medical attention before it was too late?

As in the earlier film, The Exorcist, the medical profession does not come off here in a heroic fashion. If Emily truly had epilepsy, doctors were still unable to help her in any significant fashion. If Emily was possessed, then the drugs that she was being given to treat a medical condition actually prevented her from fighting back from demonic attack and allowed her to be possessed. Once again, this speaks to our fears of being ill while science is unable to cure us as well as the terror of being out of control of our bodies, words or actions.

Listening to Father Moore’s speech at the end, part of which is quoted above, I was reminded of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s short story “Young Goodman Brown.” Like The Exorcism of Emily Rose, “Young Goodman Brown” does not give concrete answers about whether its events were truly supernatural. As I teach in the Bible belt, many of my students have preferred to take that story on a literal basis. Personally, I think Hawthorne’s point was (whether literal or not) once you let yourself see evil, you’ll see it everywhere and in everyone since we are born sinners. Goodman Brown lets this idea poison his life and destroy his happiness. As Hawthorne says, “A stern, a sad, a darkly meditative, a distrustful, if not a desperate man did he become, from the night of that fearful dream.” It hurts to lose innocence and understand that there is evil in the world – yet is not also evil to allow that to destroy your joy and prevent you from seeing the good that is in the world as well? Ultimately, Father Moore is a more reasonable fellow than Brown. He feels that he has looked into the darkness and thus, will always be touched by it, yet he still sees the good in people, like Emily Rose and her family and Erin Bruner.

Whichever way you interpret this movie, it remains a well-crafted work. Oh, and before you dismiss the idea of exorcists in our modern 21st century world, consider this: The Washington Post reported in 2005 that in July of that year 350 practicing exorcists attended a congress in Poland. Just food for thought…

Read Full Post »